Factors associated with lumbar fusion surgery: a case-control study

Socioeconomic disparities in lumbar fusion rates were exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted healthcare access and utilization throughout the US, with variable impact on patients of different socioeconomic status (SES) and race. We characterize pre-pandemic and pandemic demographic and SES trends of lumbar fusion patients in the US.

Methods

Adults undergoing first-time lumbar fusion 1/1/2004-3/31/2021 were assessed in Clinformatics® Data Mart for patient age, geographical location, gender, race, education level, net worth, and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). Multivariable regression models were used to evaluate the significance of trends over time, with a focus on pandemic trends 2020-2021 versus previous trends 2004-2019.

Results

The total 217,204 patients underwent lumbar fusions, 1/1/2004-3/31/2021. The numbers and per capita rates of lumbar fusions increased 2004-2019 and decreased in 2020 (first year of COVID-19 pandemic), with large variation in geographic distribution. There was overall a significant decrease in proportion of White patients undergoing lumbar fusion over time (OR=0.997, p<.001), though they were more likely to undergo surgery during the pandemic (OR=1.016, p<.001). From 2004-2021, patients were more likely to be educated beyond high school. Additionally, patients in the highest (>$500k) and lowest (<$25k) net worth categories had significantly more fusions over time (p<.001). During the pandemic (2020-2021), patients in higher net worth groups were more likely to undergo lumbar fusions ($150k-249k & $250k-499k: p<.001) whereas patients in the lowest net worth group had decreased rate of surgeries (p<.001). Lastly, patients' CCI increased significantly from 2004 to 2021 (coefficient=0.124, p<.001), and this trend held true during the pandemic (coefficient=0.179, p<.001).

Conclusions

To the best of our knowledge, our work represents the most comprehensive and recent characterization of SES variables in lumbar fusion rates. Unsurprisingly, lumbar fusions decreased overall with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic. Importantly, disparities in fusion patients across patient race and wealth widened during the pandemic, reversing years of progress, a lesson we can learn for future public health emergencies.

Barriers and facilitators to surgical access in underinsured and immigrant populations

BACKGROUND

Marginalized communities are at risk of receiving inequitable access to surgical care. We aimed to examine the barriers and facilitators to access to surgery in underinsured and immigrant populations.

METHODS

A systematic review of disparities in access to surgical care was performed between January 1, 2000-March 2, 2022. Methodological quality was assessed with the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. A convergent integrated approach was used to code common themes between studies.

RESULTS

Of 1315 publications, a total of 66 studies were included for systematic review. Eight studies specifically discussed immigrant patient populations. Barriers and facilitators to surgical access were categorized by patient and health systems related factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Established facilitators to improve surgical access are centered on patient-level factors while interventions to address systems-related barriers are limited and may be an area for further investigation. Research focused on access to surgery in immigrant populations remains sparse.

Risk Factors for Thirty-Day Readmission Following Lumbar Surgery: A Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Thirty-day readmission is one of the common complications after lumbar surgery. More 30-day readmission increases the total hospitalization, economic burden, and physical pain of patients, delays the progress of postoperative rehabilitation, and even lead to die. Therefore, it is necessary to analyze the risk factors of 30-day readmission following lumbar surgery.

METHODS

We searched for all the clinical trials published from the establishment of the database to May 1, 2022 through the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Embase, and PubMed. Data including age, American Society of Anesthesiology physical status class, preoperative hematocrit (Hct), diabetes mellitus (DM), current smoker, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), length of hospital stay (LHS), operation time, and surgical site infection (SSI) were extracted. We used Review Manager 5.4 for data analysis.

RESULTS

Six studies with 30,989 participants were eligible for this meta-analysis. The analysis revealed that there were statistically significant differences in the age (95% confidence interval [CI]: -3.35-2.90, P < 0.001), preoperative Hct (95% CI: 0.75-1.33, P < 0.001), DM (95% CI: 0.56-0.74, P < 0.001), COPD (95% CI: 0.38-0.58, P < 0.001), operation time (95% CI: -35.54-16.18, P < 0.001), LHS (95% CI: -0.54-0.50, P < 0.001), and SSI (95% CI: 0.02-0.03, P < 0.001) between no readmission and readmission groups. In terms of the American Society of Anesthesiology physical status class and current smoker, there was no significant effect on the 30-day readmission (P = 0.16 and P = 0.35 respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Age, preoperative Hct, DM, COPD, operation time, LHS, and SSI are the danger factors of 30-day readmission following lumbar surgery.

Disparities in Elective Spine Surgery for Medicaid Beneficiaries: A Systematic Review

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

OBJECTIVES

We sought to synthesize the literature investigating the disparities that Medicaid patients sustain with regards to 2 types of elective spine surgery, lumbar fusion (LF) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF).

METHODS

Our review was constructed in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines and protocol. We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, CINAHL, and Web of Science databases. We included studies comparing Medicaid beneficiaries to other payer categories with regards to rates of LF and ACDF, costs/reimbursement, and health outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 573 articles were assessed. Twenty-five articles were included in the analysis. We found that the literature is consistent with regards to Medicaid disparities. Medicaid was strongly associated with decreased access to LF and ACDF, lower reimbursement rates, and worse health outcomes (such as higher rates of readmission and emergency department utilization) compared to other insurance categories.

CONCLUSIONS

In adult patients undergoing elective spine surgery, Medicaid insurance is associated with wide disparities with regards to access to care and health outcomes. Efforts should focus on identifying causes and interventions for such disparities in this vulnerable population.

Disparities in Rates of Fusions in Lumbar Disc Pathologies

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE

To identify disparities in surgical decision making for lumbar disc pathologies based on patient demographics, hospital characteristics, and temporal characteristics of admission.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients admitted for surgical intervention of disc herniation or degeneration was performed to observe the effect of demographic, hospital, and admission-related factors on the decision to perform an isolated decompression or decompression with single level fusion using the National Inpatient Sample.

RESULTS

Of 84 953 patients with lumbar disc pathologies, 69 975 patients were treated electively, and 14 978 patients were treated nonelectively. Hispanic and Asian/Pacific Islander patients were less likely to receive a fusion for elective cases compared with White patients (odds ratio [OR] 0.88, P = .004; OR 0.70, P < .001, respectively). In elective cases, privately insured and self-paying patients were less likely to receive a fusion compared with Medicare patients (OR 0.83, P < .001; OR 0.66, P < .001, respectively), while this effect was limited to self-pay patients in nonelective cases (OR 0.44, P < .001). Urban teaching and nonteaching hospitals were less likely to perform fusions compared with rural hospitals in nonelective cases (OR 0.47, P < .001; OR 0.58, P < .001, respectively). Private for-profit hospitals were associated with higher rates of fusion in both elective and nonelective cases (OR 1.16, P = .003; OR 1.94, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

This study illustrates disparities in the modality of surgical intervention for lumbar disc pathologies in terms of demographics, hospital characteristics, and temporal characteristics of admission. The development of more evidence-based guidelines is warranted to reduce variability seen in treatment regimens for these conditions.

Impact of Insurance Provider on Overall Costs in Failed Back Surgery Syndrome: A Cost Study of 122,827 Patients

OBJECTIVES

Failed back surgery syndrome (FBSS) affects 40% of patients following spine surgery with estimated costs of $20 billion to the US health care system. The aim of this study was to assess the cost differences across the different insurance providers for FBSS patients.

METHODS

A retrospective longitudinal study was performed using the Truven MarketScan^® database to identify FBSS patients from 2001 to 2012. Patients were grouped into Commercial, Medicaid, or Medicare cohorts. We collected one-year prior to FBSS diagnosis (baseline), then at year of spinal cord stimulation (SCS)-implantation and nine-year post-SCS implantation cost outcomes.

RESULTS

We identified 122,827 FBSS patients, with 117,499 patients who did not undergo an SCS-implantation (Commercial: n = 49,075, Medicaid: n = 23,180, Medicare: n = 45,244) and 5328 who did undergo an SCS implantation (Commercial: n = 2279, Medicaid: n = 1003, Medicare: n = 2046). Baseline characteristics were similar between the cohorts, with the Medicare-cohort being significantly older. Over the study period, there were significant differences in overall cost metrics between the cohorts who did not undergo SCS implantation with the Medicaid-cohort had the lowest annual median (interquartile range) total cost (Medicaid: $4530.4 [$1440.6, $11,973.5], Medicare: $7292.0 [$3371.4, $13,989.4], Commercial: $4944.3 [$363.8, $13,294.0], p < 0.0001). However, when comparing the patients who underwent SCS implantation, the commercial-cohort had the lowest annual median (interquartile range) total costs (Medicaid: $4045.6 [$1146.9, $11,533.9], Medicare: $7158.1 [$3160.4, $13,916.6], Commercial: $2098.1 [$0.0, $8919.6], p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrates a significant difference in overall costs between various insurance providers in the management of FBSS, with Medicaid-insured patients having lower overall costs compared to Commercial- and Medicare-patients. SCS is cost-effective across all insurance groups (Commercial > Medicaid > Medicare) beginning at two years and continuing through nine-year follow-up. Further studies are necessary to understand the cost differences between these insurance providers, in hopes of reducing unnecessary health care expenditures for patients with FBSS.